If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

There are evils, and there are necessary evils. If you have a group work for the necessary evils and dominate in a field/region/business, then it becomes an evil empire. As an entity, the evil empire want to survive. So it will continue to do evil...
However, there is always a hope of light. Someone (for example, Ant) in the empire works for the little people like us and leak out info and good news for us to make right decision.

There are evils, and there are necessary evils. If you have a group work for the necessary evils and dominate in a field/region/business, then it becomes an evil empire. As an entity, the evil empire want to survive. So it will continue to do evil...
However, there is always a hope of light. Someone (for example, Ant) in the empire works for the little people like us and leak out info and good news for us to make right decision.

as the name imply, maybe ant is really just a trooper ant of the evil empirre

Hi T,
Thanks.
3 points.
1) Mavis does what it design to do. It is a plastic shuttle design to perform closer to the real feather shuttle than other brand's plastic bird. Mavis does great on that.
2) Mavis has average consistency and durability much better than feather shuttle.
3) Mavis was never meant to replace the real feather shuttle.
Mavis plays and feel different than feather shuttle. Different strategy and tactic need to be adapted between Mavis and feather. Mavis is not a bad shuttle, it is just a better than average/good simulation of the feather shuttle.

I beg to disagree on all 3 points. Here are the reasons:
1) Yes, Mavis is designed for non-competitive recreational play. It is not designed for competitive play like feathers are. Neither is it designed for the real game of badminton as the game should be played. Pls check with Yonex on the target markets for Yonex feathers and Mavis-two entirely different level of play. Also Yonex never claims that Mavis is designed to perform like feathers.
2) This is not relevant. To say that a plastic sheet shirt is more durable than an Egytian cotton shirt is, just like your claim, as meaningless.
3) Then why are you implying that it is designed to perform like feathers in 1) above?
Mavis is a bad badminton shuttle and your claim-even Yonex does not claim it-that it is a good simulation of feathers is some kind of a joke.
I have yet to have any feedback on court speed testing of Mavis, other than you don't have the hitting consistency to do such a test. But Cooler has earlier claimed that Mavis complies with the BWF court speed testing. Where is the proof? Instead we get gibberish replies. FYI, feathers can be made in 12 or more speeds, and each speed has a distance difference of about 30cm, making a distance range of 360cm+. This wide range can satisfy almost all the extreme conditions of playing conditions. Mavis with only 3 speeds can never hope to cover this range. Using only 3 speeds is in itself indicative of a demand from players who are not well informed, and is ideal for the beach, country and urban parks. In its early days plastics came out with many speed grades, about the same number of speed grades as feathers, with the same speed designation of 76, 77, 80, etc. But reality then set in and it is now reduced to just slow, mediem, and fast. Plastics just don't have the reach. Cooler should stop his claim that plastics would be King but for the conspiracy of BWF and the world's top players.

it is obvious that taneepak try to steer this thread back to a feather vs plastic debate which the mod had cautioned us before already. We try to comply mod's wishes but taneepak's poor memory prevented him doing so.

As i have shown in many occasions, debating with taneepak is like falling into a time warp tunnel, he just keep on spinining u around, repeating arguments that have been explained already but he'll just keep on spinning. I had also gave examples that he contradicted himself umteen times but he just ignores those.

For a guy who seem to lack understanding of the mavis shuttles and keep on making comparision to feathers is pointless.

At this point, taneepak is hijacking this 350 vs 500 thread to do his spinning agenda. I don't think it is fair to close another thread just because one persistent violator.

A little side-tracking, when it is necessary to set the points in contention, prevents taking things out of context and help keep them in perspective. Now back to the various Mavis speed testing on the courts, when, Cooler?

A little side-tracking, when it is necessary to set the points in contention, prevents taking things out of context and help keep them in perspective. Now back to the various Mavis speed testing on the courts, when, Cooler?

tonite i played 3.5 hrs with mavis 300 and loving it.
Can't remember the time i have taped so many shots than tonite.
the question is, where were u when i was speed testing them?
cut the crap talk.

tonite i played 3.5 hrs with mavis 300 and loving it.
Can't remember the time i have taped so many shots than tonite.
the question is, where were u when i was speed testing them?
cut the crap talk.

If Taneepak is so interested in the speed, why dont he test it himself

I agree that these thread easy go inte to feather vs. plastic brawl

But I think it is important to compare to feather-shuttles when comparing the different plastic models, as feather shuttles really are the yardstick of how a badminton shuttle should perform.

If we want to compare fro example Mavis 350 with Mavis 500 and establish which one is better, we need to first agree on what properties a "good" shuttle should have.

If we agree that the reference should be a top-end, rigid, precise speed, spin and balanced feather shuttle, then we can compare the different plastic on how close they come to "reference".

We could then rate their performance based on the flight, speed and feel compared to feathers, and also compare price, durability, quality, consistency etc.

If we do NOT have a common base of what "Good" flight and feel is, the performance of these shuttles can not really be objectively compared and discussed.

If I understand Cooler correctly (please correct me if I have missinterpreted your post), he argues that for example a Mavis 300 is just "different" to feather, not worse maybe even "better" in some aspects).

So how can we compare if Mavis 500 or Mavis 350 (or any other shuttle) is better or worse.. If we do not agree on what "good" and "bad" properties are, in the first place.

The problem with these types of threads lies, in that if we not have a common base of agreement of what properties of a shuttle are the "ideal", then we cannot really agree on the performance differences of any two shuttles at all. no common base of reference.

If we agree mavis 500 is slightly closer to feather than Mavis 350 I think it is fair to say its performance is slightly better. do you agree?

If we do not agree that "closer to feather" = "better performance" then we could really only stick to comparing price and durability, performance would be "subjective" and we could just easilly crown the cheapest most durable shuttle as the "best" shuttle.

If Taneepak is so interested in the speed, why dont he test it himself

I agree that these thread easy go inte to feather vs. plastic brawl

But I think it is important to compare to feather-shuttles when comparing the different plastic models, as feather shuttles really are the yardstick of how a badminton shuttle should perform.

If we want to compare fro example Mavis 350 with Mavis 500 and establish which one is better, we need to first agree on what properties a "good" shuttle should have.

If we agree that the reference should be a top-end, rigid, precise speed, spin and balanced feather shuttle, then we can compare the different plastic on how close they come to "reference".

We could then rate their performance based on the flight, speed and feel compared to feathers, and also compare price, durability, quality, consistency etc.

If we do NOT have a common base of what "Good" flight and feel is, the performance of these shuttles can not really be objectively compared and discussed.

If I understand Cooler correctly (please correct me if I have missinterpreted your post), he argues that for example a Mavis 300 is just "different" to feather, not worse maybe even "better" in some aspects).

So how can we compare if Mavis 500 or Mavis 350 (or any other shuttle) is better or worse.. If we do not agree on what "good" and "bad" properties are, in the first place.

The problem with these types of threads lies, in that if we not have a common base of agreement of what properties of a shuttle are the "ideal", then we cannot really agree on the performance differences of any two shuttles at all. no common base of reference.

If we agree mavis 500 is slightly closer to feather than Mavis 350 I think it is fair to say its performance is slightly better. do you agree?

If we do not agree that "closer to feather" = "better performance" then we could really only stick to comparing price and durability, performance would be "subjective" and we could just easilly crown the cheapest most durable shuttle as the "best" shuttle.

/Twobeer

as stated in the product review and earlier postings, M500 feel heavier than M300/350 of the same grade and later confirmed by their weight data. Also commented by someone that M500 feel slow when hit lightly but goes really far when hit hard, opposite characteristic of a model shuttlecock, be it of plastic or feather construction. Another proof is majority plastic clubs use M300, then M350. I dont know any plastic club that use M500 exclusively. If M500 perform all around better than M300/350, it would be most used but it is not the case. All these are good enough reasons

as stated in the product review and earlier postings, M500 feel heavier than M300/350 of the same grade and later confirmed by their weight data. Also commented by someone that M500 feel slow when hit lightly but goes really far when hit hard, opposite characteristic of a model shuttlecock, be it of plastic or feather construction. Another proof is majority plastic clubs use M300, then M350. I dont know any plastic club that use M500 exclusively. If M500 perform all around better than M300/350, it would be most used but it is not the case. All these are good enough reasons

A condensed version of what you write above could be that you feel M300/350 are closer to the properties I attribute to a feather-shuttle than M500..

My experince is that the problems you describe (heavier feel, to fast at fast-shots, to slow at slow-shots etc. are the same problem that Mavis 300/350 suffers from compared to shuttles made from natural feather..

SilentHart, do you agree with cooler that M300 performs better than M500.. Why have the more expensive M500 at all in the product line, if it is worse than less expensive models ?!?!

A condensed version of what you write above could be that you feel M300/350 are closer to the properties I attribute to a feather-shuttle than M500..

My experince is that the problems you describe (heavier feel, to fast at fast-shots, to slow at slow-shots etc. are the same problem that Mavis 300/350 suffers from compared to shuttles made from natural feather..

SilentHart, do you agree with cooler that M300 performs better than M500.. Why have the more expensive M500 at all in the product line, if it is worse than less expensive models ?!?!

/Twobeer

i think your tactic of trying to find weakness in mavis marketing ways to support your feather agenda, rather than use pure feather merits to support your feather agenda What and how the evil umpire want to sell and market the mavis product line u will never know. Asking us to explain the evil umpire's why and how to brand, market, and distribute mavis shuttles in hope to discover some plastic inconsistency is quite...futile.

Even if i know i wont tell u. That is the advantage reserved for plastic players. If u want to understand more about plastic, play them

i think your tactic of trying to find weakness in mavis marketing ways to support your feather agenda, rather than use pure feather merits to support your feather agenda What and how the evil umpire want to sell and market the mavis product line u will never know. Asking us to explain the evil umpire's why and how to brand, market, and distribute mavis shuttles in hope to discover some plastic inconsistency is quite...futile.

Even if i know i wont tell u. That is the advantage reserved for plastic players. If u want to understand more about plastic, play them

No cooler,

The problem is that instead of reading what i write you make faulty guesses about what I am thinking

But this has been brought up by other forum members before, so it's nothing new (and off-topic as well)

I knew this thread would get out of control with the "feather vs Plastic" postings. If you don't like playing with feather or plastic shuttlecocks then don't play badminton

hey, i did try my best to stay in topic.
As any truly good players would tell u, and discussed in BF before, it is his/her skills that make up a good player, not the equips. If the good players bat around with a 10 cents plastic thingy, it is still the individual skill that determine the winner. If both side use similar equips and shuttles, all those supposed equipment characteristic differences are balanced for both side.

it was really fun last nite after being absence of playing mavis for 4+ months. I was worrying that i might lost some mavis touch but glad i didn't.
I played MD, XD and and just 1 game of MS. All doubles were 3 gamers because of me getting adapted to mavis 300 again.

MD: 17-21, 21-15, 21-7, etc
XD: 15-21, 21-13, 21-10, etc
MS: lost badly 11-21 on first game to a lower player. Singles takes longer to adjust i guess, also i was just coming off playing doubles.

there was a group of 4 playing feathers by themselves all nite. After 2 hrs, there are 2 piles of used feather shuttles litter the floor beside each post, numbering about 2 doz of feathers LOL. I played 2.5 hrs of mavis 300, the same mavis 300 LOL. Hmm, let see. 24 feather X 1.5$ ea. /4 players = $9/player. My mavis is free because it was provided by the club. I had just as much fun as those feather players and i didn't have to waste time testing each shuttle. Imagine, those guys testing 24 feather shuttles while i get to keep on playing non stop. Being curious, I went over to the piles and counted 5 brands of feather in that piles. Poor them, so inconsistent playing with multi grade multi brand shuttles, no wonder they chop up so many LOL. Those 4 are at my level, i wouldnt call them noobs